Want A Car That Does 100+ MPG? Build It Yourself!

I would like to see one in action and do some tests, but very interesting none the less.

In 2008, we set out to build a car that would get 100 miles per gallon. Because we wanted this to be something interested MOTHER EARTH NEWS readers
could build for themselves, we also set the goals of using off-the-shelf parts and staying within a budget of $10,000 — a reasonable price for a
car. And we’ve done it! MAX (MOTHER's Automotive eXperiment) has been demonstrating its 100-mpg capabilities for a full year. (Read more about the
journey at 100-MPG Car: MAX.)

The surprise was, it wasn’t even close to a gallon, it was 0.818 gallon, $3.14, and when the official results were released, my score was 127.38
miles per gallon. Not good enough to win of course; two of the bikes had me beat by a bunch, but still...127 mpg? Really? Read more:
www.motherearthnews.com...

I just can't even imagine how many pages of NO! they'll be served with if they try to mass produce. Or even anyone else driving one for that
matter.

Of course, if mainstream mileage doesn't cut it, or you are looking to spend your money on a DIY project, by all means build the MAX car. A glorified
go-kart. The idea is good, in that it is open source, and anyone in theory can do it. Although, I have a feeling most are going to miss out on what
the professional car companies have spent years perfecting, comfort and safety.

MAX is great fun on sunny days, but to be truly practical, we need to add an enclosed cabin with a roof, doors, windows and a heater. At present,
driving MAX is much like riding a motorcycle, and the only protection you have from the elements is what you wear (glasses or goggles are
mandatory).

I can't see any mods that are engineering based except streamlining. Do people know what that means? When they do those test they keep the windows up
, no aircon, drive at low speeds like my grandmother and make a hell of a lot of mods that commercial cars would not have. Yes its great that they
tried but any average driver would not be willing to put up with the restrictions that are apllied to get that economy.

Which is why we should have collision detection, GPS assisted, remote driving systems hooked up to a national super computer mandated on public roads
by say. . . 2025 or so.

I think we'd all get there faster, going slower, yet without the idiotic stop and go, road raging retards. You could drink and get anywhere, save
fuel, and get laid all while safely traveling to your destination!

Yes, here's a list of diesel mileage cars. Most are 25+. The ones listed at 35MPG
can get many more miles to the gallon if driven with fuel efficiency driving techniques (which is how these contest cars are usually driven to get
their stats anyways).

One couple got over 80MPG with a stock VW.

The rest of the lost MPG goes to things like having an engine that can safely accelerate on the highway. Added weight from safety equipment and things
like.... windshields, etc.

If the MAX builders were so great at showing mass production atuomakers what they are doing wrong, they should have built a car ready for mass
production that had the same stats, but they can't, because the mass producers are already maximizing the attributes in a well rounded fashion that
meets demand.

The truth is, is not many people will want to buy a soapbox powered by a lawnmower engine, that has none of the features that makes driving enjoyable.
It's a great hobby car, for what purpose other than green bragging rights... I don't know...

The builders even state it is similar to driving a motorcycle, in which case, you can buy a motorcycle and get same/better mileage.

Which is why we should have collision detection, GPS assisted, remote driving systems hooked up to a national super computer mandated on public roads
by say. . . 2025 or so.

I think we'd all get their faster, going slower, yet without the idiotic stop and go, road raging retards. You could drink and get anywhere, save
fuel, and get laid all while safely traveling to your destination!

edit on 24-10-2012 by moniesisfun because: (no reason given)

Good idea, especially if it drove itself [not too far off], no more drink driving charges and if somebody was raging at me from another car I could
just hold up my scotch and coke and wish them a merry christmas.

The point is that there are plenty of vehicles that get much better, which are manufactured in the U.S. , but aren't allowed to be sold here, because
they don't pass emission testing. The thing is that emission testing looks at emissions per gallon, but neglects to factor that against the average
MPG of the vehicle compared to the national average.

It's a cop out to keep the cars off the roads. The heavier explanation is that we get taxes for the public roads from the tax on gas, so if we're
saving fuel, we will have crappier roads. It's yet another cop-out, imo. If we wanted to we could change to a flat tax to keep the same budget.

I think it means the ultimate reason is that big oil hires lobbyists to make sure the policy isn't changed, and/or pays of congressmen to keep
silent. What else could make sense of it?

This has all been debunked already, and it's been covered a few times that UK calculates mileage differently. The allegation that the US calculates
no distance when figuring out efficiency is a flat out lie:

(From the EPA website)

To determine annual greenhouse gas emissions per passenger vehicle, the following methodology was used: vehicle miles traveled (VMT) was
divided by average gas mileage to determine gallons of gasoline consumed per vehicle per year. Gallons of gasoline consumed was multiplied by carbon
dioxide per gallon of gasoline to determine carbon dioxide emitted per vehicle per year. Carbon dioxide emissions were then divided by the ratio of
carbon dioxide emissions to total vehicle greenhouse gas emissions to account for vehicle methane and nitrous oxide emissions.

It was too expensive and too small in the mid-size sedan segment. So they came up with a larger version with a better price point; and of course
the size effects the mileage. [Americans are not nearly so concerned with mileage as Europeans are.]

Third, a US gallon (3.79 L) is less than an Imperial gallon (4.546 L).

Fourth, the US government doesn't stipulate to an automobile company what vehicles they can and cannot sell, other than setting the regulations for
things like emissions, with which the manufacturers are required to comply.

Big Oil could care less on how much MPG you get. They will simply race the price from $4 USD to $12 USD a gallon. Bottom line they will get their
money regardless of the MPG and Gov't doesn't care because the higher the cost of gas/diesel the more taxes they get.

Im not being funny, but a scratch built nonsense with a piddling thirty two horsepower under its bonnet is not going to get anyone worth paying
attention to into thier workshops. That kind of pulling power wouldnt shift a family of four and thier attendant baggage, let alone be appropriate
over long distances. The max speed would be what? Forty miles an hour?

Tell you what, let me know when they can build a one hundred and fifty mile an hour, plus hundred MPG, but otherwise utterly normal car. THAT will be
useful. A chewing gum and scotch tape job with a max speed on a par with a vallium addicted eighty year old on foot is not.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.